As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen

"Tue Sorensen" wrote in message
om...
| As mentioned he
|
| http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html
|
| it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
| quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
| law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
| amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
| perpetual motion machine?

"quantum vacuum of empty space" is a contradiction. IMHO, only elementary
fermions can effectively extract energy from the quantum vacuum. The
quantum vacuum is where their so-called self-energy comes from. There is
really no other solution without resorting to singularities (magic). The
quantum vacuum as space-time is the norm. Matter is the anamoly.

FrediFizzx

(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message . com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen

What bothers me is the idea of charge. The fundamental charges of
the electron as -1 and quarkes as +2/3 and -1/3. In the beginning of
the Big Bang there were obviously no charges. At some point charges
just appeared out of nothing. So what is a "charge" of a quark or an
electron
relative to the instant in the big bang when there were no charges?
What happened in spacetime? What does a charge mean to the fate of the
Universe?

Guck
Gary Marcus

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On 13 Sep 2004 02:51:16 -0700, (Guck) wrote:

(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message
. com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen

What bothers me is the idea of charge. The fundamental charges of
the electron as -1 and quarkes as +2/3 and -1/3. In the beginning of
the Big Bang there were obviously no charges. At some point charges
just appeared out of nothing. So what is a "charge" of a quark or an
electron
relative to the instant in the big bang when there were no charges?
What happened in spacetime? What does a charge mean to the fate of the
Universe?

The big bang never happened. Its just an uproven theory.

Then you need to address the singularity theorems of GR and some simple
observational evidence - See Wald General Relativity - page 240 (I think -
guys like this do not inspire me to double check). They imply in must have
occurred.

Bill


Guck
Gary Marcus



-Barry
========
Web page: http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information.

"Guck" wrote in message
om...
(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message
. com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen

What bothers me is the idea of charge. The fundamental charges of
the electron as -1 and quarkes as +2/3 and -1/3. In the beginning of
the Big Bang there were obviously no charges. At some point charges
just appeared out of nothing. So what is a "charge" of a quark or an
electron
relative to the instant in the big bang when there were no charges?
What happened in spacetime? What does a charge mean to the fate of the
Universe?

Charge did not appear out of nothing in the sense it is not balanced ie
there in no net charge - which means there is an equal amount for positive
charge to negative charge. So you question is why does charge exist? Well
in science some things are accepted and charge may in fact be one of those
things - but strangely there is a more fundamental reason at work - namely
local QM gauge invariance - see
http://www.upscale.utoronto.ca/Gener...F13/Lect13.htm.

Bill


Guck
Gary Marcus

"Tue Sorensen" wrote in message
om...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

The ability to do useful work rests not in the fact that some particular
energy field is huge, but in the fact you have another point where it is
different. That's how a battery works. So, if you are going to plug one end
of your toaster into the zero point field, where is the other wire going to
go? Now, if you had access to another universe which has a different value
for its zero point field, you would have a nice battery replacement. Failing
that, you are left with somehow re-ordering small, quick, energy
fluctuations found in nature. If you had a magnetic rectifier that operated
at a frequency of 10^15 terahertz, you may get enough power to keep your
coffee warm. A guy named Hans Coler tried something like this in Germany
before WW2, but at least he never got anywhere with his
'magnetstromapparat'. You can try to duplicate his experiments using
neodymium magnets, and superconducting wire, but you probably wont break
even...

Greysky

"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 13 Sep 2004 22:35:36 GMT, "Bill Hobba"
wrote:


"Barry OGrady" wrote in message
.. .
On 13 Sep 2004 02:51:16 -0700, (Guck) wrote:

(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message
.com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from
the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy? If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen

What bothers me is the idea of charge. The fundamental charges of
the electron as -1 and quarkes as +2/3 and -1/3. In the beginning of
the Big Bang there were obviously no charges. At some point charges
just appeared out of nothing. So what is a "charge" of a quark or an
electron
relative to the instant in the big bang when there were no charges?
What happened in spacetime? What does a charge mean to the fate of the
Universe?

The big bang never happened. Its just an uproven theory.

Then you need to address the singularity theorems of GR and some simple
observational evidence - See Wald General Relativity - page 240 (I
think -
guys like this do not inspire me to double check). They imply in must
have
occurred.

Granted that there is evidence that a big bang might provide, but we don't
know
enough to say that it is a fact. Also, a singularity is like compressing a
large data
file down to one bit.

No one says any scientific theory is a fact - simply it is consistent with
observation - and the BB is that. And what makes you think scientists are
not well aware of the problems a singularity has and why they are working on
trying to eliminate such with quantum gravity? Next thing you will be
saying EM is up the creek because coulombs law implies an infinite field for
a point particle. Anyone aware of EM knows about it, the problems it
causes, and its solution(s).

Bill


Bill


Guck
Gary Marcus



-Barry


-Barry
========
Web page: http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information.

Tue Sorensen:
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself. Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy?

Yeah. It also contradicts all of the theories from which the
concept of the quantum vacuum derives, so I don't see a problem
with inconsistency except where someone takes a concept, ignores
the way in which the concept was developed and proceeds to engage
in meaningless speculation.

(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message . com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself.


Yes, of course, as long as nothing is impossible and the future is
unpredictable. Very good idea; I have thought of it myself but having
no time currently to wrestle with it, I have left it alone. I am glad
you brought it up. Too bad you brought it up in this venue where
closed minds prevail.


Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy?


If we ever did accomplish such a thing, it may or may not overthrow
the principle of mass and energy. If it did, it would simply be one
time that was done, but that by itself would not overthrow the
theories which have served us so well for so long, unless something
was discovered that provided a different model of reality for us.
E.g., the process may reveal something new to us about natural law,
but that something could be like SR was related to classical physics,
i.e., it was essentially a carry-forward type of scientific research.

If it did, it would not destroy any fact we have established through
proper empirical research, IMHO. It would be our salvation past our
destruction of our planet, and past some natural catastrophies. The
naysayers in this ng cannot see the value of such thinking because
their brains are covered with the chains of Pavlovian brainwashing,
and so it is up to people like you and me to save ourselves in spite
of their embarrassing behaviour.


If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen


Perhaps, but even if it wasn't, it would be good enough to salvage the
human race, I would think. The acceptance of what is called dark
matter and dark energy is the basis of your idea, I'm sure, as it was
mine. I have often argued with myself whether or not the universe
could turn out to be a great battery! I encourage you to keep on
thinking like that and to support such "wild" and "unacceptable"
ideas. Never mind the dolts on these ngs, they serve a very good
purpose for us, they help us to gauge the level of brainwashing
accomplished by our educational wizards to date, and they help us to
get motivated to continue to think!
TomGee

(TomGee) wrote in message . com...
(Tue Sorensen) wrote in message . com...
As mentioned he

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...rgy_drive.html

it might be possible to extract quite large amounts of energy from the
quantrum vacuum of empty space itself.


Yes, of course, as long as nothing is impossible and the future is
unpredictable. Very good idea; I have thought of it myself but having
no time currently to wrestle with it, I have left it alone. I am glad
you brought it up. Too bad you brought it up in this venue where
closed minds prevail.


Does this not contradict the
law of constant and conserved energy?


If we ever did accomplish such a thing, it may or may not overthrow
the principle of mass and energy. If it did, it would simply be one
time that was done, but that by itself would not overthrow the
theories which have served us so well for so long, unless something
was discovered that provided a different model of reality for us.
E.g., the process may reveal something new to us about natural law,
but that something could be like SR was related to classical physics,
i.e., it was essentially a carry-forward type of scientific research.

If it did, it would not destroy any fact we have established through
proper empirical research, IMHO. It would be our salvation past our
destruction of our planet, and past some natural catastrophies. The
naysayers in this ng cannot see the value of such thinking because
their brains are covered with the chains of Pavlovian brainwashing,
and so it is up to people like you and me to save ourselves in spite
of their embarrassing behaviour.


If we could extract large
amounts of such energy, wouldn't we effectively have a means for a
perpetual motion machine?

- Tue Sorensen


Perhaps, but even if it wasn't, it would be good enough to salvage the
human race, I would think. The acceptance of what is called dark
matter and dark energy is the basis of your idea, I'm sure, as it was
mine. I have often argued with myself whether or not the universe
could turn out to be a great battery! I encourage you to keep on
thinking like that and to support such "wild" and "unacceptable"
ideas. Never mind the dolts on these ngs, they serve a very good
purpose for us, they help us to gauge the level of brainwashing
accomplished by our educational wizards to date, and they help us to
get motivated to continue to think!
TomGee

Tom, thanks for your sympathetic reply which, to an extent, I agree
with. I have some ideas of my own (like every other crackpot here),
and in fact I do believe perpetual motion machines (i.e the extraction
from space itself of effectively limitless amounts of energy) are
possible, but I can't say I include much in the way of dark matter and
dark energy in my theory. The gravitational influence of the "missing"
("dark") matter can, I believe, largely be explained away as an
expansive force caused by a pull originating from "outside" the
spatial "edges" of the universe, in the quantum vacuum energy realm,
which I call the protean continuum (equal to the pre-Big Bang state as
well as the post-Big Rip state). As a result of this pull, the
universe expands and time speeds up. Matter goes towards energy and
all protonic mass will eventually disintegrate into energy, and the
universe will be reabsorbed into the protean continuum (which consists
of energy moving at cloese to infinite temporal speeds. Time is energy
activity. Space/gravity/matter is low-level energy activity, with time
moving very slowly).

But to everyone but me, that's really just the babbling of a fool, as
I'm sure most people here will readily concur! :-)

- Tue Sorensen